Theo Verelst Diary Page

Latest: 29 january 2001

I've decided after good example to write some diary pages with toughts
and events.

Oh, in case anybody fails to understand, I'd like to remind them
that these pages are copyrighted, and that everything found here may not
be redistributed in any other way then over this direct link without my
prior consent. That includes family, christianity, and other cheats. The
simple reason is that it may well be that some people have been ill informed
because they've spread illegal 'copies' of my materials even with modifications.
Apart from my moral judgement, that is illegal, and will be treated as
such by me. Make as many references to these pages as you like, make hardcopies,
but only of the whole page, including the html-references, and without
changing a iota or tittel...

And if not? I won't hesitate to use legal means to correct wrong
that may be done otherwise. And I am serious. I usually am. I'm not sure
I could get 'attempt to grave emotional assault' out of it, but infrigement
on copyright rules is serious enough. And Jesus called upon us to respect
the authorities of state, so christians would of course never do such a
thing. Lying, imagine that.

January 26, 2001

I didn't complete the programming course taste idea yet, and not
the network solution section either, not because I can't (obviously
enough), but I didn't feel like it enough, and because they are
ideas a bit in the thinking realm still. For instance the
matrix solution for in the latter and examples for the former can
be made interactive as well, which is nice and illustrative
(what a word). I find the subjects relevant for personal reasons
and for lets say general reasons, the latter because networks
and programming are quite relevant in both the computer related
world, being of considerable magnitude, and the world system,
and I can contentwise make very clear that there are at
least bad thinking modes I can demonstrate to rightfully disagree
with.

Networks and religion

I looked up 'agape' (the greek word for a certain form of love)
in french lexicon the other day. A paragraph in french, don't
think too much about it, its good for practice, and fun enough.

Enough french? Guess so. In short, I wonder wether it is
possible to explain colors to a color blind? Sort of. It is
quite impossible for a slave I would think
to understand what the intrinsic difficulties are of
sinning in the live of a serious democrat in greek times,
maybe with the exception of some that live with them.

Now about Luke. The idea is that the network title is about
what people form together when they think together, either
in some unarticulated way when there is mutual influencing
in a way that can only be circumscribed, such as the causes
for in-love chemicals to be released in the brain, affecting
other areas of live, or in a wordly form when spoken words
or articulated thoughs are exchanged. The question is wether
something can be said about the whole and sub-parts of such
preferable non-machinery. The answer as an engineer and
scientist would normally be that it should be considered
possible, and desirable, and as human being I would say
it is of primary essence that at least one knows what one
is dealing with, and what the options are.

Luke's first sentences are quite interesting in straightforward
greek rendering. I though about it, I don't have the greek
lexicon here, I don't think I'll dare to put sentences down
from only memory, but the essence is that he, like John,
speaks about words that from heaven formed him in essential
ways, and that he considers it of importance that the
'pragmata', methods (of living) are made clear. A lot of interesting
and clear figurative language is used, which is quite worth
putting on an english page, maybe more then most other
passages I've tried, and quite relevant in terms of the
way things worked. I think Luke was a (edified?) physician.

Anyhow, 'In the beginning was the word, and the word was with
God, and the word was God' (talking about Jesus, Gods son),
is clearly indicative of the importance of the greek
word that here is translated with 'word' in new testament
teaching. So the word of god is important, and the
possible network, or connection between Him, his thoughts,
his ideas, and, whatever that would mean, his Spirit, is
probably of prime importance to life on earth having to do
with him. And considering He is the giver of His life, that
is probably the only thing realy worth it amoung degenerated
mankind, He will have something to say about it.

Without question that is also why there is such attention
for doctrine and communicating Gods words in the bible.
And words, amoung images, and possibly personal touch,
are the prime way in which God seems to communicate.

What about deamons? Unregenerated man, and the natural world
is not permitted in direct contact with God, theoretically
and practically. The spiritual is then what is called
'dead', devoid of contact with God. Does that mean there can
be no knowledge of or about Him? Of course not, the bible,
(true) christian utterances, prophesies, visible, observable works
he does are all available, but no direct spiritual contact.
That does not mean there are no spirits that will claim
to be God even, a known favorite ambition of the satan for
instance, which in the bible is portraied as not all to
intelligent, subdued at times even to one angel alone,
and certainly not rightfully the head of the world.
Various demons, smaller and bigger ones will try to claim
they speak gods words, are god, or the holy spirit, or whatever
makes them perceived in certain ways. It it never worth following
them, or even listening to them. Of course evil people will
play games with the principle of letting deamons generate
lies, indice fear, back up and come up with their false
doctrines that bring them advantage, and take spiritual
place amoung them when they see fit.

Now about the network. Lets talk about a network where the
links carry words and the nodes spanning the network precieve
and / or utter words. Then one node is God, another is me,
yet another is another person, and maye still another could be
a deamon, and in physical sense, there are books and
computers that are able to reproduce words. When I, with
or without bible code, Israel, Jesus' fruits and contemporary
visible signs of Gods work, decide that certain words are
most probably originating with God, it becomes interesting,
and in my opinion generally advantageous to learn
about them, and take them serious as they are intended.

What happened to the babylonic speach network after it was
damned by God, if we take that story for literal and correct?
They didn't understand eachothers' language anymore, the network
apearently didn't serve their purpose anymore, they spread
out and various nations seem to have formed.

What was with the nazi network? The head wasn't courageous,
powerfull, and dignified enough in the end to continue its own
life, and the whole network appearently wasn't truthfull
enough to make it to a complete misery over the world.

Are human, both physical and spiritual networks influenced by
modern communication means? The physical questionless are,
they depend on communication means, and anyone not within
speaking distance needs some non-verbal communication network link.

7 years ago or so ago (just happens to be roughly the number)
I did research in computer networking area, and I produced
software units that would talk to eachother, quite like in
normal language even, except to could utter sentences over
different channels simultaneously, and listen to more than
one source at the time. And the talk would not be all too
elevated: put this bit of data there, give me that information,
start computing this and that, inform me when it is done,
what are you doing? That sort of communication.

I've recently mentioned my connection server, which communicated
about desired connections, sort of like various nodes in the
internet also do when a webpage is requested somewhere.
That means the network communicates about its own structure.
In the graphics software I made, as an example, the processes,
the programs running in parallel, that together would make
computer graphics images would start up other processes to
complete the task with together. That on itself is not new,
there are thousands of programs on varous operating systems
that utilize the principle, but the thinking in general terms
about such networks of programs with an amount of logic
or intelligence in them, that significantly form structures
themselves to perform certain computations was, and
is fashionable in a not too common software design thinking.
Object orientedness isn't the idea here (remember, I professionally
programmed in Objective C, a bit more scientifically oriented,
more set-thinking equiped,
OO language maybe older then C++, for at least 5 years, with
working and even efficient enough results), it is about
processes running as independent entities communicating
in a known language, structuring (virtual) networks themselves while
they run. That means they have a communication protocol, which
is also not a new concept, ask computer for 30 years,
midi equiped synthesizers for at least 15 years, etc. But it
is interesting, and scientifically fashionable enough to
consider how such communicating processes can be utilized
and described together.

Also in my more tcl/tk page, networks of semi-parallel
communicating blocks can be made, that form, and when
requested break, their connection structure, and
where the network may grow and change with time, under
external (my) control, or by internal control, such
as one of more conceptual blocks.

Now is it possible to say general things about such networks?
Of course. And that is where it starts to get relevant in an
essential way in my opinion, as a comparision with the human, too.
Supose I have on node with the capability to generate
a 'delete all' message that can be triggered somehow,
then I will want to make sure, I don't have a chance
of connecting with that branch of the network unless
I can trust that that won't happen. Or supose I want
to find certain information, then for sure I'll need
to find some reliable path to a reliable enough node
containing the information I'm looking for.

Is God into all this? Reading His word, it seems that He has
various ways of creating, destroying, and rendering damned
various constellations of people, having various doctrines
and lives, which in general language at least
seem to be clearly qualitatively described in
for instance the book of revelation. And from the source of the life
that spans the whole of what we can ever be, that information
is most likely important.

It seems that though God is truthfull at times he lets people
'have' a lie, I'll need to read the greek, but at least
He doesn't always blow lies away straight away, and He,
being almighty and eternal and all of course has mysteries
not understandable by man, probably, our brains are limited
(and demonic thinking patterns even worse, they usually
suck real bad, and take seconds to throughsee).

Now what about 'doctrines of deamons'. I think they are simply
what the language states, a kind of truth (seemingly) that a
demon suggests or points at, and that will of course always
damn the listener taking it to heart. There is no good in them,
realy. It is written (what a expression) that fake
apostles even, in the time of Peter would produce misery
and damnation with their 'truth', that would wither as
cancer, well, it did, and still does. Punishment from God,
if they have aching ears they want to have scratched with lies, they
can have em, God does not force himself in general on
such persons, if they want lies, they can make them. Those
fake apostles and deceitfull workers are then human,
and their doctrines, too, will damn when taken for good news.
They give and have given religion a bad name, for clear
reasons. Lets focus on a truthfull gospel that is good news.

Analog samples

I got 7 chips for free from Analog Devices, a major electronics
components manufacturer, as procucts samples, even with the
datasheets. In electronics, datasheets are sort of a standard
idea: they contain in language of the field all information
about a part, the connections, the electrical properties,
their dynamical behaviour, temperature sensitivity, even
the geometry and measures of their case, and in a standard,
and appreciated form: Introduction about the part with
main features, description of functioning, all electronical
featuers on a row in a table with generally known constants
and measurement units (these are usually hundreds of figures
easily), then a set of graphs plotting interesting
parameters and their dependence on certain contitions,
then application examples, and case drawings, maybe followed
by appendices with theoretics, more applications, and
literature list (and the address of the manufacturer or
supplier)

I've known them since I was little, and they hardly changed,
which is pleasant. For someone in the field, the datasheet
and the part are enough to built some piece of working electronics
with. So one can go over (new for isntance) part lists,
see what would be usefull, fun or nice, get the parts and
their datasheet, and one can make a circuit with them. Major
hobby over many years, and scientifically very valid.
I've regularly wished computers, operating systems and
software would be documented the same. Just to form
thoughts the right the whole hart of the modern PC, the
pentium chip, has its own datasheets too, hunderds of
pages about the chips connections, the instructions,
the internal busses, the electrical properties, everyhting
(it seems). Surf to Intel, check for datasheets in the
menus for developers section, prepare acrobat, and have
a look. Of course the datasheets are illegible for non
experts in certain fields, but the interesting part is
that with some background knowledge about computer parts,
and maybe a word and acronym list, it is realy possible
to learn about every little bit of what normally is
known of the pentium. No bull, no fuzzyness, not
even that much company secret in terms of applying the part
(not it internals), just pretty objective technical data.
Available for free (minus the internet connection or the
cheap enough print),
quite legible for someone with computer design knowledge,
though still complicated of course, and in line in buildup and
logic with other types of datasheets.

Major fun I had long periods of my life with electronics and
computer parts was to get magazines and catalogs (including
radio shacks), scan for new and interesting (and at the time
cheap) parts, an plan and make designs with them. I was
completely aware of the reasons for wanting chips: they
saved incredible amounts of work and money. I could get
chips to do digital and analog jobs that would take
massive amounts of parts to do with conventional parts,
in some cases a few hundred, in other cases such as computer
circtuiry one chip would replace easily tens or hundreds of thousands
parts. And they were often cheap enough, few guilders to maybe a few
tens. Organ, light organs, all kinds of running lights, a
audio circuits, games, measurement tools, supplies,
sensors, all kinds of fun gadgets or essential (for me at the time)
equipment, all made easier and cheaper by chips.

That still holds: my digital synthesizer would be pretty much impossible
without integrated circuits, and they're quite cheap. And the
number of parts and work it would take to built a heavy,
reliable, and high quality 100 Watt audio amplifier from
'normal' electronics parts is considerable. Nothing like
a little circuit board with two hands full of cheap electronics
parts and a chip that together (without heatsink) literally
fit in a normal sized matchbox.

Would all this end at some point? It didn't the last 20 years
when I witnessed it. It's still more than fun enough, storing a
phonebook of information on a little black box with connections
the size of a quarter or something with battery power lasting
long is fun enough. A wristwath with real digital camera
for prizes even kids can ask for is fun enough. A gps unit in
a watch, with tracker to see where the watch has been over
a period of time could be dangerous to evil, and is completely
affordable (the latter two are products I picked from Casio's
website).

I now got some operational amplifiers for instance,
with up to date specifications. In electronicists terminology,
300 MHz gbwp, low noise enough, good distortion figures,
high load outputs, rail to rail driving. In short a few
dollars (or less) for general purpose amplifier chips that
can do video amplification even for high quality computer
monitors with very little quality loss, as well as maybe
a radio receiver job, as well as audio pre-amplification
probably with specs amoung the very top hifi range.

One little thing: these things are for, indecently put, asians..
They are tiny. The size of a small knot, with wires apart just enough
to use a pincet on. Realy, the biggest ones under 'normal'
electronics parts wire distances (being 2.56 mm) are
a twentiest of an inch. That should be just doable. I've
received one that without realizing it has pins about half a
millimeter (!) apart, just above loupe size, I'm not sure I
can trick connections with that easily without the right
tools. Normally, these parts are put on a Printed Circuit Board
with the connections chemically etched or maybe mechanically
cut for a prototype, where the part is put in place by a
soldering technique with for instance hot air, or
simply glued in place with conductive, carbonized glue
on the pins and the pcb. Works good for wireless phones and
palmtops and such. But of course thats not so much intended
for hobby use, and when they brake, who will repair them?

Are those datasheets interesting? They are not like lets
say the specification of large, nechanical electrical parts
like switches and lights, with lots of measures and colour
coding and such, though some may have interest in them, too.
They mainly evolve around known specification methods, lets
say how much current they use, how fast they are, what
type of input and output loads they can handle, their maximum
amplification, how much noise they produce in addition to
the signal, and how faithfull they transmit signals. All
these kinds of opamps have figures for these parameters, and
can be relatively boring.

Unless they are extreme, or advanced. Lets say an amplifier
unit with a maximum frequency (bandwidth) of 1200 Mega herz
10 years ago was extreme. Probably not at secret HPlabs,
but for normally available parts that would be 1 or 4, maybe
20 up to sometimes a hundred megaherz (costly), but not that high.
Another interesting point, related, is that the datasheets
would normally contain information on how to apply such a
part, which is instructional. How are signals of such high
frequencies actually carried to and from the part. It seems
for instance that those small, surface mounted devices
as they are called, are much better at dealing with such
high frequencies because of their lead (wire/pins) design.

state vs. who ?

The official documents of the us together in a paperback made
me raise an eyebrow by a title: the state versus Holland, it
one title reads, or something to that extend. Now there could
be masses of titles like that, but there aren't. What is this?
Picture the 20's/30's. There seems to be a canadian city
or province, where wild birds were supposedly shot, or something,
I forgot the exact story, or maybe that's where they crossed the
border of the us, and were shot down in hunting. Anyhow, the issue at stake
was that the federal gouvernment was to decide wether a state
had the right to decide on an issue maybe about the passing
over of these birds to their feeding grounds in yet another state or
hunting them
down, by itself, or wether the federal level would interfere in
this case. Normally the issue was a state matter, but in this
case it was easily decided on, I guess in the interest of
the birds, that the states' souvereignty in the matter would
be lifted.

This was amoung dignified and officially relevant other legal
cases, and the document of state such as the declaration of
independence, the constitution, and such. Remarkeble reading,
I've already remarked before, the 'persuit of happyness'
against the denial of the authority of the 'english king',
what a weight and place this is given. It's interesting also to
see what is written at high (or low) times of history such
as 1917 (about working laws), of course WO I (some quotes
I must refresh in my memory, I don't dare to just give em),
and the horrible times of WO II, starting with the declaration of
war after pearl harbour, and also the (half a year later)
official declaraton of war against germany, with some
strong and lets say upright language worth quoting acccurately.

Then Yalta (sucks, but the russians strike me as almost
funny in the proceedings in certain ways), and I was looking
for official documents on the main event countering the
japanese evil, the nuclear bomb, but there isn't any. I guess
it was secret and covered by the press afterward.
May have been hard to take a vote in the congress about it,
but still, this is not nothing. I remember a documentary where
the president was passed a secret note, and that continuously
some of the involved, secretly operating, army men and
scientists were communicating their worries and uncertainties
about the possible effects and the responsibilities involved
in actually detonating such a horrible and destructive device.
They must have prayed a lot, and I know that one of the
worries, apart from war and maybe 'humane' considerations
was that the whole earth might become part of nuclear chain
reaction and burn like the sun. Einstein was involved I
think for similar reasons.